In Australia

Published:PravdaNo. 134, June 13, 1913.
      Signed:W..
      Published according to thePravdatext.Source:Lenin
	  Collected Works,
      Progress Publishers,1977,
      Moscow,Volume 19,
      pages216-217.Translated:The Late George HannaTranscription\Markup:R. CymbalaPublic Domain:Lenin Internet Archive
      (2004).You may freely copy, distribute,
	display and perform this work; as well as make derivative and
	commercial works. Please credit “Marxists Internet
	Archive” as your source.•README

Ageneral election recently took place in Australia. The
Labour Party, which had a majority in the Lower House—44 seats out of
75—was defeated. It now has only 36 seats out of 75. The majority has
passed to the Liberals, but this majority is a very unstable one, because
30 of the 36 seats in the Upper House are held by Labour.

Whatsort of peculiar capitalist country is this, in which the workers’
representatives, predominate in theUpperhouse and, till
recently, did so in the Lower House as well, and yet the capitalist system
is in no danger?

AnEnglish correspondent of the German labour press recently explained
the situation, which is very often misrepresented by bourgeois writers.

TheAustralian Labour Party does not even call itself a socialist
party. Actually it is a liberal-bourgeois party, while the so-called
Liberals in Australia are really Conservatives.

Thisstrange and incorrect use of terms in naming par ties is not
unique. In America, for example, the slave-owners of yesterday are called
Democrats, and in France, enemies of socialism, petty bourgeois, are called
Radical Socialists!  In order to understand the real significance of
parties, one must examine not their signboards but their class character
and the historical conditions of each individual country.

Australiais a young British colony.

Capitalismin Australia is still quite youthful. The country is only
just taking shape as an independent state. The workers are for the most
part emigrants from Britain. They left the country at the time when the
liberal-labour policy held almost undivided sway there, when the masses of
the British workers wereLiberals. Even now the majority of the
skilled factory workers in Britain are Liberals or semi-Liberals.This is the results of the exceptionally favourable, monopolist position
enjoyed by Britain in the second half of the last century. Only now are the
masses of the workers in Britain turning (but turning slowly) towards
socialism.

Andwhile in Britain the so-called Labour Party is analliancebetween the non-socialist trade unions and the extremely opportunist
Independent Labour Party, in Australia the Labour Party is theunalloyedrepresentative of the non-socialist workers’ trade
unions.

Theleaders of the Australian Labour Party are trade union officials,
everywhere the most moderate and “capital serving” element, and in
Australia, altogether peaceable, purely liberal.

Theties binding the separate states into a united Australia are still
very weak. The Labour Party has had to concern itself with developing and
strengthening these ties, and with establishing central government.

InAustralia the Labour Party has done what in other countries was done
by the Liberals, namely, introduced a uniform tariff for the whole country,
a uniform educational law, a uniform land tax and uniform factory
legislation.

Naturally,when Australia is finally developed and consolidated as an
independent capitalist state, the condition of the workers will change, as
also will theliberalLabour Party, which will make way for asocialistworkers’ party. Australia is an illustration of the
conditions under whichexceptionsto the rule are possible. The
rule is: a socialist workers’ party in a capitalist country. The exception
is:
a liberal Labour Party which arises only for a short time by virtue of
specific conditions that are abnormal for capitalism in general.

ThoseLiberals in Europe and in Russia who try to “teach” the people
that class struggle is unnecessary by citing the example of Australia, only
deceive themselves and others. It is ridiculous to think of transplanting
Australian conditions (an undeveloped, young colony, populated by liberal
British workers) to countries where the state is long established and
capitalism well developed.